In September 2024, NCRP’s Senior Movement Engagement Manager for Climate Change Senowa Mize-Fox and NCRP’s Research and Development Associate Spencer Ozer attended New York City Climate Week. Climate Week is a series of events sponsored by The Climate Group that aims to bring together actors from all different sectors with a shared vision of tackling the complicated and multifaceted issues of the climate crisis. In this special 2-Part blog post, you will hear from Ozer and Mize-Fox as they recount their key takeaways from their time at Climate Week 2024. This is part 2 of 2.
The buzz around this year’s Climate Week was palpable, showcasing one of the largest turnouts in the event’s history. People from all over the world attended in an attempt to spread the message of climate mitigation and try to learn what can be done to save our planet. This year was my first Climate Week and the enthusiasm of everyone present could not be missed. I was shocked by the variety of lectures, panels, presentations, and other events that were being held throughout the week. Still, despite the vast number of talks and diversity of the attendees, there were some glaring shortcomings present throughout the week.
Beneath the excitement, familiar dynamics persisted. To me, it felt as if there were two very different conferences happening at the same time, one conference for funders, the other for movement groups. Movement-led events during Climate Week centered around advancing the principles of a just transition. These discussions are built on existing community-led solutions, focusing on equity, justice, and sustainability. They emphasized the importance of leveraging local knowledge and ensuring that the transition to a low-carbon economy prioritizes those most affected by climate change.
In contrast, funder-led events leaned heavily on technocratic approaches, with much of the focus on new technologies and innovative possibilities. These discussions often carried a sense of excitement about the potential for breakthroughs but were less rooted in the lived experiences of frontline communities. Despite the richness of ideas on both sides, the events often felt siloed, with limited interaction between movement groups and funders. Attendees tended to stick to events within their respective circles, creating an echo chamber effect where conversations seemed to “preach to the choir.” The lack of audience crossover underscored a persistent gap: How can we foster more meaningful exchanges between funders and movement groups to align strategies and amplify impact?
While in New York City, I had the pleasure of sitting on a panel alongside Climate Justice Alliance (CJA) and the Tishman School for Environment and Design to discuss some timely research I had done for a project called the Just Returns Project. We investigated the investment and grantmaking strategies of some of the most influential climate funders in the sector whose values aligned with our own. Our goal was to accurately identify how these funders were investing their money in order to find out if these funders’ investment strategies were aligned with their missions, stated values, and grantmaking strategies. The reason this type of data is important to look at is because a lot of funders are talking about climate justice and a just transition, but not all of them are necessarily acting on these principles. And even among those funders who are starting to shift toward incorporating a just transition into their organizational strategy, investment portfolios are often overlooked as being part of that strategy. NCRP’s research shows that many funders are in fact undermining their own grantmaking by investing in extractive industries that directly work against their mission. That is why it’s important to make this information known, so we can help these funders more effectively shift toward a just transition approach.
The division of priorities between funders and movement groups was apparent as I looked out at the audience during the panel discussion. The Just Returns Project was conceived by people in the frontline climate movement, aimed to bring funders and movement leaders together in the same room to discuss issues in the sector. However, there were almost no funders in the room, despite many being invited to attend. This raised a critical question: How can movement-supported ideas and goals be implemented if funders are not actively engaging with those driving these efforts?
The disconnect between the two groups reflects the broader challenges in the philanthropic space. Funders often operate within a framework that prioritizes innovation and scalability, while movement groups focus on community-driven solutions that may not fit neatly into these paradigms. Bridging this gap requires a fundamental shift in how funders view their role in the climate movement. As Climate Week highlighted, there is no shortage of passion or ideas within the climate movement. However, achieving a just transition will require more than parallel efforts—it will require true collaboration. Funders have a unique opportunity to support the vision of frontline communities by aligning their resources with movement-led strategies, and now is the time to seize that opportunity.
The challenge is clear: How do we ensure that funders are not only present but actively engaged in these critical conversations? Until this issue is addressed, the potential of the climate movement to drive transformative change will remain constrained. As we move forward, it’s crucial to reflect on these challenges and seek out solutions that foster deeper connections and shared commitment. The future of our planet depends on our ability to work together—across silos, sectors, and strategies—to build a just and sustainable world.
Spencer joined the NCRP team in December 2019 as a research and development intern and has since become a vital member of the organization’s Research team. As a Research Associate, his efforts have focused on data collection and analysis for NCRP’s Movement Investment Project, as well as assisting the Engagement Team.
Before NCRP, Spencer held several hands-on positions working with animals. While he is passionate about protecting wildlife and natural resources, he now enjoys putting his skills as a researcher to good use strengthening communities and supporting the mission of NCRP.
Spencer received a B.A. in Environmental Studies from Eckerd College. As an undergraduate student, he developed a passion for research, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative data to study the relationship between people and the environment.
Other than large datasets, Spencer enjoys the outdoors, music and his cat.
Leave a Reply